Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-768dbb666b-bxbhv Total loading time: 0.491 Render date: 2023-02-05T07:29:13.966Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

Attitudes toward Highly Skilled and Low-skilled Immigration: Evidence from a Survey Experiment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2010

JENS HAINMUELLER*
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MICHAEL J. HISCOX*
Affiliation:
Harvard University
*
Jens Hainmueller is Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139 (jhainm@mit.edu).
Michael J. Hiscox is Clarence Dillon Professor of International Affairs, Department of Government, Harvard University, 1737 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, MA 02138 (hiscox@fas.harvard.edu).

Abstract

Past research has emphasized two critical economic concerns that appear to generate anti-immigrant sentiment among native citizens: concerns about labor market competition and concerns about the fiscal burden on public services. We provide direct tests of both models of attitude formation using an original survey experiment embedded in a nationwide U.S. survey. The labor market competition model predicts that natives will be most opposed to immigrants who have skill levels similar to their own. We find instead that both low-skilled and highly skilled natives strongly prefer highly skilled immigrants over low-skilled immigrants, and this preference is not decreasing in natives' skill levels. The fiscal burden model anticipates that rich natives oppose low-skilled immigration more than poor natives, and that this gap is larger in states with greater fiscal exposure (in terms of immigrant access to public services). We find instead that rich and poor natives are equally opposed to low-skilled immigration in general. In states with high fiscal exposure, poor (rich) natives are more (less) opposed to low-skilled immigration than they are elsewhere. This indicates that concerns among poor natives about constraints on welfare benefits as a result of immigration are more relevant than concerns among the rich about increased taxes. Overall the results suggest that economic self-interest, at least as currently theorized, does not explain voter attitudes toward immigration. The results are consistent with alternative arguments emphasizing noneconomic concerns associated with ethnocentrism or sociotropic considerations about how the local economy as a whole may be affected by immigration.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bauer, T. K., Lofstrom, M., Zimmerman, K. F.. 2000. Immigration Policy, Assimilation of Immigrants, and Natives' Sentiments towards Immigrants: Evidence from 12 OECD-Countries. IZA Discussion Paper No. 187, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).Google Scholar
Bertrand, M., Mullainathan, S.. 2001. “Do People Mean What They Say? Implications for Subjective Survey Data.” American Economic Review 91 (2): 6772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Betts, K. 1988. Ideology and Immigration: Australia, 1976 to 1987. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
Bhagwati, J. 2002. The Wind of the Hundred Days: How Washington Mismanaged Globalization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Borjas, G. 1999. Heaven's Door. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Borjas, G. 2003. “The Labor Demand Curve Is Downward Sloping: Reexamining the Impact of Immigration on the Labor Market.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 118 (4): 1335–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borjas, G. 2005. Native Internal Migration and the Labor Market Impact of Immigration. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borjas, G., Freeman, R., Katz, L.. 1996. “Searching for the Effect of Immigration on the Labor Market.American Economic Review 86 (2): 246–51.Google Scholar
Borjas, G., Freeman, R., and Katz, L.. 1997. “How Much Do Immigration and Trade Affect Labor Market Outcomes?” In Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 1997:1, Macroeconomics, eds. Perry, George L. and Brainard, William C.. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 190.Google Scholar
Brezis, E., Krugman, P.. 1993. Immigration, Investment, and Real Wages, NBER Working Paper 4563, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burns, P., Gimpel, J.. 2000. “Economic Insecurity, Prejudicial Stereotypes, and Public Opinion on Immigration Policy.” Political Science Quarterly 115 (3): 201–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callegaro, M., DiSogra, C.. 2008. “Computing Response Metrics for Online Panels.” Public Opinion Quarterly 72 (5): 1008–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., Stokes, D. E.. 1960. The American Voter 1960. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Card, D. 1990. “The Impact of the Mariel Boatlift on the Miami Labor Market.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 43 (2): 245–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Card, D. 2001. “Immigrant Inflows, Native Outflows, and the Local Labor Market Impacts of Higher Immigration.” Journal of Labor Economics 19 (1): 2264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Card, D. 2005. “Is the New Immigration Really So Bad?.” Economic Journal 115 (507): F300F323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Card, D. 2007. How Immigration Affects US Cities. Technical report, CReAM Discussion Paper, Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration, University College London.Google Scholar
Case, C. E., Greeley, A. M., Fuchs, S.. 1989. “Social Determinants of Racial Prejudice.” Sociological Perspectives 32: 469–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandler, C. R., Tsai, Y.-M. T.. 2001. “Social Factors Influencing Immigration Attitudes: An Analysis of Data from the General Social Survey.” Social Science Journal 38 (2): 177–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Citrin, J., Green, D.. 1990. “The Self-Interest Motive in American Public Opinion.” In Research in Micropolitics, Vol. 3, ed. Shapiro, Robert. Greenwich: JAI Press, 128.Google Scholar
Citrin, J., Green, D. P., Muste, C., Wong, C.. 1997. “Public Opinion towards Immigration Reform: The Role of Economic Motivations.” Journal of Politics 59: 858–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dustmann, C., Preston, I. P.. 2006. “Is Immigration Good or Bad for the Economy? Analysis of Attitudinal Responses.” Research in Labor Economics 24: 334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dustmann, C., Preston, I. P.. 2007. “Racial and Economic Factors in Attitudes to Immigration.” B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis and Policy 7 (1): Article 62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, R. S., Luttbeg, N. R., Tedin, K. L.. 1991. American Public Opinion: Its Origins, Content, and Impact. 4th ed.New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Espenshade, T. J., Hempstead, K.. 1996. “Contemporary American Attitudes toward U.S. Immigration.” International Migration Review 30: 535–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Facchini, G., Mayda, A.. 2009. “Does the Welfare State Affect Individual Attitudes toward Immigrants? Evidence across Countries.” Review of Economics and Statistics 91 (2): 295314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feenberg, D., Coutts, E.. 1993. “An Introduction to the TAXSIM Model.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 12 (1): 189–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fetzer, J. S. 2000. Public Attitudes toward Immigration in the United States, France, and Germany. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fix, M., Passel, J.. 2002. “The Scope and Impact of Welfare Reforms Immigrant Provisions.” Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Discussion Paper 02-03.Google Scholar
Fix, M., Passel, J., Enchautegui, M.. 1994. Immigration and Immigrants: Setting the Record Straight. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.Google Scholar
Friedberg, R., Hunt, J.. 1995. “The Impact of Immigrants on Host Country Wages, Employment and Growth.The Journal of Economic Perspectives 9 (2): 2344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gang, I. N., Rivera-Batiz, F. L., Yun, M.-S.. 2002. Economic Strain, Ethnic Concentration and Attitudes towards Foreigners in the European Union. IZA Discussion Paper No. 578, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).Google Scholar
Gaston, N., Nelson, D.. 2000. “Immigration and Labor-Market Outcomes in the United States: A Political-Economy Puzzle.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy 16 (3): 104–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goot, M. 2001. “Public Opinion on Immigration.” In The Australian People. 2nd ed., ed. Jupp, James. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 824–26.Google Scholar
Green, D., Gerken, A.. 1989. “Self-Interest and Public Opinion toward Smoking Restrictions and Cigarette Taxes.” Public Opinion Quarterly 53 (1): 116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossman, G., Helpman, E.. 1994. “Protection for Sale.” American Economic Review 84 (4): 833–50.Google Scholar
Hainmueller, J., Hiscox, M. J.. 2006. “Learning to Love Globalization: Education and Individual Attitudes toward International Trade.” International Organization 60 (2): 469–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hainmueller, J., Hiscox, M. J.. 2007. “Educated Preferences: Explaining Attitudes toward Immigration in Europe.” International Organization 61 (2): 399442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanson, G. H. 2005. Why Does Immigration Divide America? Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
Hanson, G., Scheve, K., Slaughter, M.. 2007. “Public Finance and Individual Preferences over Globalization Strategies.” Economics and Politics 19 (1): 133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanson, G., Scheve, K., Slaughter, M.. 2008. “Individual Preferences over High-Skilled Immigration in the United States.” In Skilled Migration Today: Prospects, Problems, and Policies, eds. Bhagwati, Jagdish and Hanson, Gordon. New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 2444.Google Scholar
Harwood, E. 1986. “American Public Opinion and U.S. Immigration Policy.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 487: 201–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hero, R., Preuhs, R.. 2007. “Immigration and the Evolving American Welfare State: Examining Policies in the US States.” American Journal of Political Science 51 (3): 498517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, R. 1971. “A Three-Factor Model in Theory, Trade, and History.” Trade, Balance of Payments, and Growth 1: 321.Google Scholar
Kessler, A. 2001. Immigration, Economic Insecurity, and the “Ambivalent” American Public. Working Paper. La Jolla, CA: Center for Comparative Immigration Studies.Google Scholar
Kiewiet, R., Kinder, D.. 1981. “Sociotropic Politics.” British Journal of Political Science 11 (2): 129–61.Google Scholar
Kinder, D., Sears, D.. 1981. “Prejudice and Politics: Symbolic Racism versus Racial Threats to the Good Life.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 40: 414–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, G., Murray, C., Salomon, J., Tandon, A.. 2004. “Enhancing the Validity and Cross-Cultural Comparability of Measurement in Survey Research.” American Political Science Review 98 (1): 191207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krugman, P., Obstfeld, M.. 2000. International Economics: Theory and policy. 5th ed.Reading, MA: Addison–Wesley Longman.Google Scholar
Lahav, G. 2004. Immigration and Politics in the New Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leamer, E., Levinsohn, J.. 1995. “International Trade Theory: The Evidence.” In Handbook of International Economics, Vol. 3, eds. Grossman, G. M. and Rogoff, K.. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1339–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, E. 2005. Immigration, Skill Mix, and the Choice of Technique, Philadelphia, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, Research Dept.Google Scholar
Longhi, S., Nijkamp, P., Poot, J.. 2005. “A Meta-Analytic Assessment of the Effect of Immigration on Wages.” Journal of Economic Surveys 19 (3): 451–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansfield, E., Mutz, D.. 2009. “Support for Free Trade: Self-Interest, Sociotropic Politics, and Out-Group Anxiety.” International Organization 63 (2): 425–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayda, A. 2006. “Who Is Against Immigration? A Cross-Country Investigation of Individual Attitudes toward Immigrants.” Review of Economics and Statistics 88 (3): 510–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayda, A., Rodrik, D.. 2005. “Why Are Some People (and Countries) More Protectionist than Others?European Economic Review 49 (6): 1393–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaren, L. 2003. “Anti-immigration Prejudice in Europe: Contact, Threat Perception, and Preferences for the Exclusion of Migrants.” Social Forces 81 (3): 909–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaren, L., Johnson, M.. 2007. “Resources, Group Conflict, and Symbols: Explaining Anti-immigration Hostility in Britain.” Political Studies 55 (4): 709–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mutz, D. 1992. “Mass Media and the Depoliticization of Personal Experience.” American Journal of Political Science 36 (2): 483508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ottaviano, G., Peri, G.. 2008. Immigration and National Wages: Clarifying the Theory and the Empirics. NBER Working Paper 14188, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER).Google Scholar
Rowe, G., Murphy, M., Williamson, M.. 2006. Welfare Rules Databook: State TANF Policies. Report by The Urban Institute.Google Scholar
Scheve, K., Slaughter, M.. 2001. “Labor Market Competition and Individual Preferences over Immigration Policy.” Review of Economics and Statistics 83 (1): 133–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, D., Funk, C.. 1990. “The Limited Effect of Economic Self-Interest on the Political Attitudes of the Aass Public.” Journal of Behavioral Economics 19: 247–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, D., Lau, R., Tyler, T., Allen, H.. 1980. “Self Interest vs. Symbolic Politics in Policy Attitudes and Presidential Voting.” American Political Science Review 74: 670–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, J. 1989. The Economic Consequences of Migration. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Smith, J. P., Edmonston, B., eds. 1997. The New Americans: Economic, Demographic, and Fiscal Effects of Immigration. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, W., Tumlin, K. C.. 1999. Patchwork Policies: State Assistance for Immigrants under Welfare Reform. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.Google Scholar
537
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Attitudes toward Highly Skilled and Low-skilled Immigration: Evidence from a Survey Experiment
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Attitudes toward Highly Skilled and Low-skilled Immigration: Evidence from a Survey Experiment
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Attitudes toward Highly Skilled and Low-skilled Immigration: Evidence from a Survey Experiment
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *